Judicial Watch » secretary of laborhttp://www.judicialwatch.org
Because no one is above the law!Fri, 31 Jul 2015 23:31:46 +0000en-UShourly1Judicial Watch Statement on the Nomination of Thomas Perez as U.S. Secretary of Laborhttp://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-statement-on-the-nomination-of-thomas-perez-as-u-s-secretary-of-labor/
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-statement-on-the-nomination-of-thomas-perez-as-u-s-secretary-of-labor/#commentsFri, 22 Mar 2013 17:24:27 +0000http://www.judicialwatch.org/?post_type=press_release&p=15629 ‘Thomas Perez has shown a glaring inability to follow his sworn duties to tell the truth and dispassionately apply the basic constitutional tenet of equal justice under law.’ (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement today regarding the nomination of Thomas Perez to be the next Secretary of Labor in...

]]>‘Thomas Perez has shown a glaring inability to follow his sworn duties to tell the truth and dispassionately apply the basic constitutional tenet of equal justice under law.’

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement today regarding the nomination of Thomas Perez to be the next Secretary of Labor in the Obama Administration:

“During his time as the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), Thomas Perez has shown a glaring inability to tell the truth and dispassionately apply the basic constitutional tenet of ‘equal justice under law.’

“Time and again in recent years, Judicial Watch has exposed Mr. Perez’s repeated attempts to undermine those seeking to assure that the laws of the land are applied equally to those of all races. Mr. Perez’s attacks on election integrity measures such as voter ID were so far off base that he helped the DOJ earn a reputation as a partisan campaign arm for the Obama reelection campaign.

“As Secretary of Labor, Mr. Perez would be in a position to push policies which broadly discriminate against American workers who failed to meet his own, thoroughly racialist worldview. Furthermore, based upon his relentless record both in and out of government, there can be little doubt that he would continue to put his personal preference for illegal immigrants above the rights of all workers of any race to equal employment opportunity.

“Mr. Perez is a terrible, hyper-partisan choice for Labor Secretary. Honest Democrats and Republicans who want the Labor Department to be run well should look skeptically at his nomination.”

In November, 2010, Judicial Watch produced documents obtained from the Obama Department of Justice in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuitdirectly contradicting sworn testimony by Perez before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that no political leadership was involved in the DOJ decision to abandon its own voter intimidation lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense. The Black Panther Party had been charged with threatening and intimidating white voters outside a Philadelphia polling station on Election day 2008.

“The documents reveal that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case, which would appear to contradict Assistant Attorney General Perez’s testimony that political leadership was not involved in that decision.”

The DOJ’s Office of Inspector General recently released a report entitled “A Review of the Operations of the Voting Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division,” which confirms the court’s ruling: “We believe that these facts evidence ‘involvement’ in the decision by political appointees within the ordinary meaning of that word,” and that Perez’s statements, “did not capture the full extent of that involvement.” The report also documents that Perez does not believe in the race neutral application of certain civil rights laws.

Also in 2012, Judicial Watch discovered that Perez may have colluded with St. Paul, Minnesota, officials to persuade the city to take the extraordinary step of withdrawing its cert. petition from the Supreme Court docket in a case involving “disparate impact” discrimination. Documents obtained by Judicial Watch under the Minnesota Data Practices Act showed that St. Paul City Attorney Sara Grewing arranged a meeting between Perez and Mayor Chris Coleman a week before the city’s withdrawal from the case, captioned Magner v. Gallagher. Following Perez’s visit, the city withdrew its case and thanked DOJ and officials at HUD for their involvement.

Documents and a staff briefing with the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform revealed in September 2012 that, in exchange for St. Paul dropping its case before the high court, DOJ stopped two whistleblower claims against the city with the power to restore $180 million in violated HUD grants to the U.S. taxpayer. The Wall Street Journal confirmed Judicial Watch’s concerns in an investigation of its own and noted that the issues are “likely to get high billing” at Perez’s confirmation proceedings.